On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 6:40 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Feel free to close it out. I'm satisfied that we've had a discussion about
> it.
Closed it out.
--
Peter Geoghegan
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 6:39 PM James Coleman wrote:
> I very much do not like this approach, and I think it's actually
> fundamentally wrong, at least for the memory check. Quicksort is not the only
> option that uses memory. For now, there's only one option that spills to disk
> (external
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 06:33:32PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 5:22 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > Because filtering out zero values is exactly what's intended to be avoided
> > for
> > nontext output.
> >
> > I think checking whether the method was used should result in
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 8:22 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 09:18:44PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 9:05 PM Justin Pryzby
> wrote:
> > > So my 2ndary suggestion is to conditionalize based on the method
> rather than
> > > value of space used.
> >
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 5:22 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Because filtering out zero values is exactly what's intended to be avoided for
> nontext output.
>
> I think checking whether the method was used should result in the same output,
> without the literal check for zero value (which itself sets
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 09:18:44PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 9:05 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > So my 2ndary suggestion is to conditionalize based on the method rather than
> > value of space used.
>
> What's the advantage of doing it that way?
Because filtering out
